We are a small county with no access in the courthouse to criminal histories--when my office needs it, we request from law enforcement. Defendants every once in a while ask that we run our own witnesses. The judge has twice now requested that I comply with this. I have case law that says it was not error to not order the State to inquire of its own witnesses, but the judge ordered it anyway. Is there a web site that anyone can access that shows general criminal histories--not TCIC, but some lesser personal history? I have heard that some courthouses have terminals where there is this limited access? If I had some place the defense could look on their own, then I think the judge would agree it's not in my exclusive possession and no longer require me to go get it.

Most of the websites that actually provide info worth a darn you will have to pay for or subscribe to. However, from experience, that stuff is not always correct as they usually aren't relying on fingerprints but just "same" info (like name and DOB).

Does your office have TCIC access at all (access back in your office or do you ALWAYS have to have law enforcement run it)?

If you don't have TCIC access at all (always have LE run it), then get with your Sheriff's Office to try to get a terminal for your office. Someone at the SO (usually your director of communications) is the liasion with DPS Criminal Records/TCIC and there is a procedure to request adding a terminal. They can and should be able to help facilitate that request.

If you have access, but your office is not in the courthouse.... do you have a secure small office at the courthouse? If so, if you may be able to get TCIC linked to a specific person's login (like your investigator) to a computer that is secured and meets DPS requirements.

Hope this helps!

Thanks for the info on terminals...an idea we have talked about but not taken measures on. Do you have any names of websites? Are prosecutors routinely running TCICs on officers and civilians before they testify?

Our judges often order us to run criminal histories on civilian witnesses but not peace officers. I'd recommend that if you are ordered to provide the ch itself to the defense or anyone else that you ask the judge to allow you to redact all of the personal info such as dob, ss#, etc. Providing that type of info for public consumption is just asking for identity theft to occur. Also, at the latest Elected Prosecutor conference last December, we had a lecture and an excellent handout which covered the discovery of criminal histories and why it shouldn't take place. If you're interested in the handout, drop me an email at distattorney@co.liberty.tx.us and I'll try to find my materials when I get back in the office on Thursday. Last, I'm not sure how we got hooked into the system, but my chief investigator runs criminal histories on his computer via a DPS website. His name is Ivan Pearce and he can be reached at 936-336-4617. He'll be happy to fill you in on the procedure that he follows. Hope this was some benefit to you. Good luck.

When sensitive material is part of our open-file policy, we enter into agreed protective orders with defense attys. (CPS records, CCH, videos of interviews of child sex asslt vics and the like). The orders limit who will be allowed to view such material and require its return after disposal of the case. Contempt proceedings or file closure to the offending party put teeth in the agreement. With our new paperless system, we can absolutely deny file access to attys who willfully or recklessly expose sensitive material to folks excluded in the order.

If we have a discovery hearing, our judges will require that we give this information to the defense, so we provide the info voluntarily. However, after attending a DPS sponsored class on TCIC, I have learned that we as prosecutors can not actually hand a copy of a TCIC over to the defense. To do so could cost your office or your local law enforcement agency that ran the TCIC for you to lose their terminal. We simply provide the information to the defense lawyer during plea negotiations without letting them actually look at the print out.

I think DPS allows people to pay a subscription fee to access some portion of their criminal history information. I've never tried it, but I know its there. You would probably need more information on it, but I wonder if that might work to make it equal access?

I would highly recommend all District Attorney/County Attorney Offices obtain their own TLETS terminal. It can be set up on any existing computer terminal. I would suggest to first contact your head of communications at your local sheriff's office. They should know who to contact at DPS to extend to the DA's office. There will be some paperwork to complete and provide an approved secure area. Our office has terminals on all investigator's computers and some secretaries also have access. Each person with access must complete and 8 hour course, conducted by a DPS approved instructor. Also, a good starting point would be to contack Joann Jenkins with DPS at 512-424-2419. With a TLETS terminal, in addition to TCIC criminal history checks, you also have access to NCIC, Texas and out of state DLs, etc.

Rob is correct that you WILL lose your terminal if you just hand out a copy of a TCIC printout to anyone that is not law enforcement or an agency designed to view this info.

You may also be committing a Class B misdemeanor by giving out the info as well so be extremely careful with this info. Anyone in your office that has access to criminal histories is supposed to go thru at least a 2 hour class with DPS to be authorized to look at the info. The more acess you have, the more training you need. For example, your investigator needs at least the 4, 8, or 16 hr class. Usually your Sheriff's office communications director can teach it (if they are large enough). Otherwise contact DPS. If you will call me at (512) 943-1111, I can give you direct numbers to the DPS staff that handles requests, classes, putting in terminals, etc.

To alleviate committing any violations, our prosecutors summarize the info on a separate sheet of paper and provide it to defense attys in that format. We are sometimes ordered by the Judge to run witnesses, victims and peace officers. We argue against this, but sometimes don't win.

DPS online maintains a Crime Records Service site. They have a public portion as well as a secure site for law enforcement. Our probation department has used it for quite some time now. About a year ago, my office submitted an application for access as well. Now I can access Texas criminal history. The access is free. More info is available on the DPS website.

I suppose the issue becomes whether it is a Class B misdemeanor when you are relying on a written interpretation of the law made by a public official charged by law with responsibility for interpreting the law in question. Unfortunately, you must still believe that the conduct would not constitute a crime in order to raise the affirmative defense.

I am having a hard time saying that just because you do not hand over the printout itself you are not violating the law or DPS policy by reformulating the very same information. While the court order is obviously void (in violation of said statute and art. 39.14), how does one avoid the wrath of both the judge and the DPS where obtaining and disclosure of the info has been ordered by the court?

A subsidiary issue is: when does this information constitute "Brady material" and why is it considered to be in your possession if you have to electronically travel to Austin to get it from an entirely different agency?

The actual thing I have been ordered to disclose reads as follows: "the prior criminal record of all state's witnesses including all arrests and convictions, whether as a juvenile or as an adult, including but not limited to all felony convictions and all misdemeanor convictions involving moral turpitude which have occurred in the last ten years; all felony convictions and all misdemeanor convictions involving moral turpitude which have resulted in a suspended sentence which has not been set aside; all felony and misdemeanor cases which have resulted in the person being placed on probation, wherein the period of probation has not expired; and all pending felony and misdemeanor offenses." Obviously this is way beyond what is spoken of in Rule 609.

Another paragraph of the order requires that the State forthwith make inquiry and disclose all of the following: all records and information showing a prior criminal record in state or federal court of all state's witnesses, with criminal records including all pleas of guilty or nolo contendere which resulted in dispositions of "deferred adjudication" and all felony, misdeanor and juvenile arrests.

Obviously I might spend the rest of my lifetime actually complying with that type of inquiry and disclosure.

Thanks so much for all the input. I will be e-mailing and calling for more details.

Mr. Peterson, I agree that it's difficult to say it's in my possession when I have to go through all this to track it down. Even more, to get the information needed from some of the officers and civilians, we will have to call them and get dates of birth. So not only do I not have access to it, I don't even have all the information I need and will have to research before I can get it. Seems far beyond exclusive possession to me, too.

When this has come up in the past we either run them or have them run and if it is something we know that could be used for impeachment, etc. we tell the defense and give them the particulars, or in some instances, just run all but law enforcement and give all the cch's to the court and it does an, "in camera" inspection to see if the defense should be given any information on any witness. Both State and Federal laws prevent just giving the info out to the defense or anyone, not authorized.

The Brady issue is a very broad and pervasive one, it seems the fact you don't have it, or know personally that it exists is not enough, so even if you don't have the ability to run someone in your office, if your local sheriff, etc. can run it, you need to get them to do so in case there is something there that could be "Brady material".

[This message was edited by JScroggins on 08-24-06 at .]